Recently, CNN Thailand Correspondents Dan Rivers and Sarah Snider have
made me seriously reconsider your agency as a source for reliable and
accurate unbiased news. As of this writing, over thousands of CNN's
viewers have already begun to question the accuracy and dependability
of its reporting as regards events in Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq, Iran,
etc., in addition to Bangkok.

As a first-rate global news agency, CNN has an inherent professional
duty to deliver all sides of the truth to the global public who have
faithfully and sincerely placed their trust and reliance in you. Your
news network, by its longtime transnational presence and extensive
reach, has been put in a position of trust and care; CNN's
journalists, reporters, and researchers have a collective
responsibility to follow the journalist's code and ethics to deliver
and present facts from all facets of the story, not merely one-sided,
shallow and sensational half-truths. The magnitude of harm or
potential extent of damage that erroneous and fallacious news
reporting can cause to (and exacerbate), not only a country's internal
state of affairs, economic well-being, and general international
perception, but also the real lives and livelihood of the innocent and
voiceless people of that nation, is enormous. CNN should not
negligently discard its duty of care to the international populace by
reporting single-sided or unverified facts and distorted truths drawn
from superficial research, or display/distribute biased images which
capture only one side of the actual event.

Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider have NOT done their best under these
life-threatening circumstances because many other foreign
correspondents have done better. All of Mr. Rivers and Ms. Sniders'
quotes and statements seem to have been solely taken from the
anti-government protest leaders or their followers/sympathizers. Yet,
all details about the government's position have come from secondary
resources. No direct interviews with government officials have been
shown; no interviews or witness statements from ordinary Bangkok
residents or civilians unaffiliated with the protesters, particularly
those who have been harassed by or suffered at the hands of the
protesters, have been circulated.

Why the discrepancy in source of information? Why the failure to
report all of the government's previous numerous attempts to negotiate
or invitations for protesters to go home? Why no broadcasts shown of
the myriad ways the red protesters have terrorized and harmed innocent
civilians by burning their shops, enclosing burning tyres around
apartment buildings, shooting glass marbles at civilians from high
altitudes, attacking civilians in their cars, and worst of all,
obstructing paramedics and ambulances carrying civilians injured by
M79 grenade blasts during the Silom incident of April 24, 2010,
thereby resulting in the sole civilian casualty? The entire timeline
of events that have forced the government to take this difficult
stance has been hugely and callously ignored in deference to the red
'underdogs'.

Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider's choice of sensational vocabulary and
terminology in every newscast or news report, and choice of images to
broadcast, has resulted in law-abiding soldiers and the
heavily-pressured Thai government being painted in a negative, harsh,
and oppressive light, whereas the genuinely violent and law-breaking
arm of the anti-government protesters - who are directly responsible
for overt acts of aggression not only against armed soldiers but also
against helpless, unarmed civilians and law-abiding apolitical
residents of this once blooming metropolis (and whose actions under
American law would by now be classified as terrorist activities) - are
portrayed as righteous freedom fighters deserving of worldwide
sympathy and support. This has mislead the various international Human
Rights watchdogs to believe the Thai government are sending
trigger-happy soldiers out to ruthlessly murder unarmed civilians
without just cause.

As a current resident of "war zone" Bangkok who has experienced the
effect of the Red protests first hand and is living in a state of
constant terror and anxiety as to whether her family, friends, and
home would get bombed or attacked by the hardcore anti-government
vigilantes/paramilitary forces - I appeal to CNN's professional
integrity to critically investigate and scrutinize the misinformed
news reporting of your above-named correspondents. If they are
incapable of obtaining genuine, authentic facts from any other source
except the Red Protest leaders and red-sympathizing Thai translators
or acquaintances, or from fellow non-Thai-speaking journalists who are
similarly ignorant of Thai language, culture, history, and society,
then perhaps CNN should consider reassigning field correspondents to
Thailand.

I implore and urge you to please take serious action to correct or
reverse the grave injustice that has been done to the Thai nation, her
government, and the majority of law-abiding Thai citizens and
expatriate residents by having endorsed and widely circulated poorly
researched and misrepresented news coverage of the current ongoing
political unrest and escalating violence in Thailand.

Copies of this open letter have also been distributed to other local
as well as international news media and social networks for public
information. Please feel free to contact me further should you require
any additional concrete and reputable evidence in substantiation and
corroboration of my complaints and claims stated hereinabove.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Napas Na Pombejra, B.A., LL.B. (Lond.)
Bangkok, Thailand
May 17, 2010

Addendum

Enclosed herewith for your attention and information some examples of
other quality international news bulletins by respectable foreign
journalists so you may assess at your leisure the sub-par quality and
misleading nature of Mr. Rivers and Ms. Sniders' journalism: